more at http://www.theuptake.org
University of Minnesota Professor John Logie talks about how the Clinton campaign has interjected race into the election and how Hillary Clinton's "concession" speech shows just how close this race really is.
This is a second part of John Logie's analysis.
As has often been the case in this campaign, Barack Obama delivered a speech that was exemplary in terms of political rhetoric. The takeaway phrase in this was "the choice in this election is not between regions or religions or genders. It's not about rich vs. poor, young vs. old and it is not about black vs. white. It is about the past vs. the future". Barack Obama clearly thinks that's a winning message. This was the central point in a speech that was highly visible. And it's an argument that might well change the dynamics of the upcoming contest on what we're now stupidly calling "Super Duper Tuesday".
It will be interesting to see how the mainstream media covers Obama victory and in particular Obama's powerful speech. Or whether the next news cycle is dominated by someone who has a habit of dominating news cycles and that's Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton managed to pull the focus away from his wife's campaign yet again with his comparison of Barack Obama to Jesse Jackson.
The clear import of Clinton's comparison is to suggest that Black candidates do well in South Carolina and thus, Barack Obama then impending victory could be discounted because "hey, South Carolina voters tend to like Black candidates."
With that I think we can close any further debate as to whether the Clinton campaign is actively injecting race as an issue into the 2008 Democratic primary season. They are doing it. Bill Clinton is doing it. Whether he is the designated attack dog for the Clinton campaign or just a loose cannon, this is unfortunate. It's especially unfortunate given the sharp contrast between Clinton's role in this campaign and the role of his predecessors have tended to take in previous campaigns. Admittedly ...